Objectives
To compare the
effectiveness and safety of antipseudomonal β-lactam empiric
monotherapy for febrile neutropenia by network meta-analysis.
Methods
Searches using
Pubmed, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE and Web of Science Core Collection
were carried out in June 2016. English articles, non-English
articles, full-length articles, short articles and conference
abstracts were allowed. Eligible trial design was a parallel-group
individual randomization. We included febrile neutropenia adult and
paediatric patients undergoing chemotherapy for either solid tumours
or haematological malignancies and treated with intravenous
antipseudomonal β-lactams for initial empiric therapy. Protocol was
registered with PROSPERO ID 42016043377.
Results
Of 1275 articles
detected by the search, 50 studies with 10 872 patients were finally
included. Among the guideline-recommended cefepime, meropenem,
imipenem/cilastatin, piperacillin/tazobactam and ceftazidime;
imipenem/cilastatin showed the highest odds of treatment success
without modification, which was the primary endpoint, based on the
random-effect model network analysis. Ceftazidime was related to
lower treatment success rate without modification compared with
imipenem/cilastatin with OR of 0.71 (95% CI 0.57–0.89, p 0.006).
Imipenem/cilastatin showed the lowest odds of all-cause death.
Patients treated with cefepime had higher risk for all-cause death
compared with those treated with imipenem/cilastatin (OR 2.05, 95% CI
1.11–3.78, p 0.029). Any adverse event was significantly more
prevalent in the imipenem/cilastatin arm; however, there was no
difference concerning adverse events leading to discontinuation.
Conclusions
Imipenem/cilastatin,
piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem may be reasonable first-choice
medications for empiric therapy of febrile neutropenia.
No comments:
Post a Comment